TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 18 of 20 FirstFirst ... 381314151617181920 LastLast
Results 426 to 450 of 481

Thread: THREAD OF HYPE

  1. #426
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    I'm very good at blunt refusals.
    ...
    I don't think my refusal is blunt.
    ...
    I wasn't complaining. Just said: "bummer".
    That is some incredible equivocating. Or poor communication skills. Possibly both. In case you're actually unaware, this is literally a complaint:

    And that is exactly why I want to play slow. And on top of that, I want to spend my time focusing on the environment, the city, the NPCs, the story. And not on game-elements like finding food or doing fist-fights and searching for bandages.

    It's ok if those elements are part of the game. But they should not be the core of gameplay.
    As for this:

    We're not talking art here. We're talking about a game.
    This is the most boring discussion possible on the internet. We're not having it. I've got other tedious things to do instead.

    And yes, I'm going to play the sequel, obviously.

  2. #427
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    I can not imagine why someone would want to make or play a game that is "unfun".
    Especially when that game should earn you a living. I fully agree that developers should not try to cater for the masses. Because then you get boring games. But making a game that is not fun for anyone (except the mindless fanboys and utter masochists), that is a bit weird.
    I've played games that left me physically sick and shaking and I've played games that frustrated me to no end. Rain World was one of the last of those. Papers Please, Spec Ops: The Line, Far Cry 2, Hotline Miami, Undertale, Silent Hill 2, Resident Evil 4, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus -- all of these have some pretty unfun mechanics and I would argue they are better for it. These are also some of the most memorable games that I've ever played. Wanting all games to be fun is like wanting all stories to have a happy ending.

  3. #428
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: Switzerland
    Gryzemuis: "Developers shouldn't try to cater to the masses, but they should cater to me!"

    ... you don't see the teensiest hypocrisy there?

  4. #429
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Also, Dark Souls was never about HARD BOSSES. For all the hype, Dark Souls is not actually all that hard, apart from a couple of pretty unfair and frustrating difficulty spikes and some optional content. The difficulty in Dark Souls is more about the growth that comes from hard work and diligence. If you are careful and think about what you're doing, if you explore and experiment, if you're willing to learn and improve, the game will bend to you, and that gives you a feeling of accomplishment that few other games can. You can actually break the game and make it less enjoyable by taking the challenge out of it. I've seen new people level too much in Darkroot Forest or play through the DLC too soon and it made the game frustratingly easy for them.

  5. #430
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    I am slightly disappointed about Pathologic 2. Hence the word: "bummer". That is something different than complaining. I didn't pay for development of the game, I didn't pay for a copy of the game. So I am aware I can't complain. I'm not. I'm just disappointed that it turns out Pathologic is not the game for me. Good news: it seems Pathologic has a console. And one can change several settings via the console. Maybe a few weeks or months from now people have figured out how to make time go slower and how to reduce the effects of hunger, thirst, etc. If that happens, I might buy and play the game after all.

    I wasn't the first to use the word "art". Quote: "art doesn't have to entertain everyone". I am perfectly fine to not continue that discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Starker
    These are also some of the most memorable games that I've ever played.
    Being in a car crash is also very memorable. But I rather not do that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thirith
    you don't see the teensiest hypocrisy there?
    I never wrote that developers should cater to me. I wish developers would make games that they would enjoy themselves. And I wish they would try to make something that is different from the rest. If lots of developers would do that, we might have a broader spectrum of games to chose from. And even though I probably wouldn't like most of them, it would increase the amount of games that people do find fun. And it would increase the chances of games being surprising. I think this opinion is very different from "all games should cater to me".

    It won't happen, because even if we could have lots of different games, most developers want to make "the most popular game" to make the most profit. I understand this, so I don't think they "should". I'm not complaining. I just wish they did.

    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    Also, Dark Souls was never about HARD BOSSES. For all the hype, Dark Souls is not actually all that hard, apart from a couple of pretty unfair and frustrating difficulty spikes and some optional content. The difficulty in Dark Souls is more about the growth that comes from hard work and diligence. If you are careful and think about what you're doing, if you explore and experiment, if you're willing to learn and improve, the game will bend to you, and that gives you a feeling of accomplishment that few other games can. You can actually break the game and make it less enjoyable by taking the challenge out of it. I've seen new people level too much in Darkroot Forest or play through the DLC too soon and it made the game frustratingly easy for them.
    When you read about Dark Souls, google for Dark Souls, read threads on forums, it certainly has the reputation of being a hard game. I sometimes read the Reddit Dark Souls forums. And about half the posts there are: "look at me, I beat this boss, I beat the game, it was soo hard, I am so happy".

    I don't want to reduce the difficulty. I want to reduce the tedium. In particularly, one of the design-flaws of Dark Souls is that it punishes bad and new players too hard. It doesn't punish the new players by taking more time. It punishes bad and new players by making the game harder. I think that is wrong. (Not complaining, just stating my opinion). A game should be "easy to learn, hard to master". But in fact, DS is the opposite. Hard to learn, easy once you've climbed the initial learning curve. As an example: when you die, you lose humanity, ember or (in DS2) max-health. If you die a lot, you run out of humanity and embers. Or your max-health goes to 50% in DS2. And you can't summon NPCs (or players) anymore. The game gets a lot harder. Another example: in DS1 at the start you find 3 lightning resins. Advise on the net how to beat the gargoyles: use a resin. The problem here is that you have a limited amount. If you fail the fight 3 times, you don't have lightning resins left. Making the fight a lot harder. Not a problem for good or experienced players. But for new/bad/inexperienced players, it makes the game harder. I don't think that makes sense. Losing souls on death is also not helpful for new players. But it can be overcome. Running out of embers and resins, etc, is different thing.

    I took some of the tedium out of the game. I sometimes copy savefiles, and copy them back if I don't want to redo part of the game. (Like the run to O&S). I guess you call that cheating. Or you think I'm reducing the challenge. I don't care. I'm not harming anyone, and the game is more fun for me. Nowadays, I don't need it anymore, because I don't die often enough to run out of important items. But if I hadn't done it during my first runs, I might not have been able to beat bosses. I think it took me 30-50 tries to beat the Nameless King. I can do it in 1-3 tries now. I would not have been able to learn to do that, if I hadn't had unlimited embers. Another example: in DS2, I did the same thing for the run to the Blue Smelter demon. I think From Software understands why I do it. Because in the DS3, the later bosses all have bonfires next to them.

    Regardless of the fact that I made the games easier for myself, I am still enjoying it very much.
    Last edited by Gryzemuis; 27th May 2019 at 10:48.

  6. #431
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    Being in a car crash is also very memorable. But I rather not do that.
    I meant memorable in a good way. When I think fondly back on those frustrating moments, it's because they were meaningful, because they added to the game. The same with Dark Souls. Without the difficulty, the game is diminished, I would argue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    When you read about Dark Souls, google for Dark Souls, read threads on forums, it certainly has the reputation of being a hard game. I sometimes read the Reddit Dark Souls forums. And about half the posts there are: "look at me, I beat this boss, I beat the game, it was soo hard, I am so happy".
    It's vastly overblown. With Dark Souls, it's a magician's trick most of the time, you just need to learn the trick. The bosses look huge and imposing, but you can block almost any attack. It seems like any hit from them would do you in, but you can usually take several and heal quite a bit of damage for free with estus (I actually think 20 swigs is too much and 10 would have sufficed). And outside of the bosses, most of the difficulty comes from not being careful and not paying attention. Plus Dark Souls is full of things you can use to greatly turn the odds in your favour, such as magic, buffing, kiting, summoning NPCs and players, and so on. Or you can just go and level up to make things easier. It's not an RPG for nothing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    I don't want to reduce the difficulty. I want to reduce the tedium. In particularly, one of the design-flaws of Dark Souls is that it punishes bad and new players too hard. It doesn't punish the new players by taking more time. It punishes bad and new players by making the game harder. I think that is wrong. (Not complaining, just stating my opinion). A game should be "easy to learn, hard to master". But in fact, DS is the opposite. Hard to learn, easy once you've climbed the initial learning curve. As an example: when you die, you lose humanity, ember or (in DS2) max-health. If you die a lot, you run out of humanity and embers. Or your max-health goes to 50% in DS2. And you can't summon NPCs (or players) anymore. The game gets a lot harder. Another example: in DS1 at the start you find 3 lightning resins. Advise on the net how to beat the gargoyles: use a resin. The problem here is that you have a limited amount. If you fail the fight 3 times, you don't have lightning resins left. Making the fight a lot harder. Not a problem for good or experienced players. But for new/bad/inexperienced players, it makes the game harder. I don't think that makes sense. Losing souls on death is also not helpful for new players. But it can be overcome. Running out of embers and resins, etc, is different thing.
    You don't lose humanity when you die, you only lose humanity (and souls) when you don't make it back to your bloodstain. Additionally, nothing consequential happens even when you do lose them. Humanity is infinitely farmable from very early on and the amounts of souls you lose are typically pitiful. Plus there are lots of ways to manage these resources by saving up hard currency and regularly spending soft currency. And in other Souls games like Demon Souls and whatnot there are items to mitigate and reverse any loss you incur on death. Also, you don't beat the Gargoyles with resin -- that's just bad advice for complete newbies. You beat him with the help of Solaire or by leveling up in Darkroot Garden and farming titanite shards.


    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    I'm not harming anyone, and the game is more fun for me.
    I don't care what you do with your game. I just stated what I have observed from watching a lot of blind playthroughs. When the game stopped being challenging, it started being considerably less enjoyable for those players. Sure, you can play games like Doom in god mode or by giving yourself all the guns and still have fun, but nothing gives that adrenaline and dopamine rush like the right amount of challenge with just enough stakes to make it a nerve-wrecking on the edge of your seat kind of unforgettable experience. And the satisfaction from beating such a challenge is unlike anything else. And same goes for games like Nethack and savescumming -- these games are not meant to be completed, they are meant to be mastered, conquered. If you take too many shortcuts in that, you aren't just cheating the game, you are cheating yourself out of an experience that's meant to be a journey and an adventure in and of itself -- the chance to face and overcome adversity by growing and learning, and yes, the chance to fail and experience frustration.
    Last edited by Starker; 27th May 2019 at 14:06.

  7. #432
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    You lose your humanity/embering when you die, it has nothing to do with if you pick up your souls from your bloodstain or not.

    That means that your max health is reduced. Sometimes repeatedly the more you die, depending on which game.

    DS3 does it a little less nastily by having embering give you bonus health on top of your normal pool, rather than dying or not being embered slowly taking your health away.

  8. #433
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Ah yes, got a bit confused what with the similar terms and all. I thought it referred to benefits you get from carrying around liquid humanity. Well, the game is not meant to be played constantly running around in human form in the first place. Think of it as a buff more than the normal state. It's main use is to allow you to summon help for bosses you are having difficulty with. It's limited because it's meant to be used sparingly, especially as the summoned helpers can kill the boss on their own without you lifting a finger.
    Last edited by Starker; 27th May 2019 at 23:57.

  9. #434
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    I don't want to discuss the details. I was trying to get a point across: some games are easy to learn, hard to master. And other games are hard to learn, but easy once you mastered them. I think good games should try to be the first. Not only because I'd like that. I think it's also good for the developer's income. And it's just friendlier to potential players.

    That being said. During the last year I've got all the achievements in DS1, DS2 and DS3. And then last month (April) I decided to try a SL1 run. I got to Pontiff. Then I beat the Dancer (much to my surprise). I cheesed Oceiros (with a bow, because everyone says he's so frustrating at SL1). Then I stopped at Dragonslayer Armour. Yesterday I continued and killed DSA. Today I just killed Pontiff and Aldritch as SL1. I bet no one here expected me to do that !
    BTW, I still think DS3 should have an easier difficulty-level for new players.

    And to make my earlier point, that I play games the way I like to: Everybody knows that in a SL1 run you have to play a Deprived and have all stats at 10. No problem for most people, because they will roll their way through the game anyway. But I like to use a shield. I've always used shields, in DS1, DS2 and DS3. I've beaten the Fume Knight by tanking him with a shield. But in DS3 there are no 100%-block shield with a requirement of only 10 strength. The closest thing is Silver Eagle Kite Shield. Which requires 11 strength. So I gave myself 1 extra strength. And while I was at that, I realized that you can't use a bow unless you have 12 dexterity. So I gave myself 2 extra dex. So I am doing my SL1 run at an actual level of SL4. I'm sure all the other SL1-runners don't agree. And I'm sure they are think I am depriving myself of the "real SL1 challange". But I don't care. I do my SL1-run at SL4. And I'm having fun.
    Grand Archives next !

  10. #435
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Dark Souls is not a mainstream game, catering to masses. You can tell that from the tutorial alone -- where other games would teach you step by step the mechanics of the game, DS tells you what the controls are and lets you figure things out on your own. It's aimed at people who are to a degree already games literate, not for people who hold the controller for the first time. And that's a line you can draw from King's Field through Demon Souls through Bloodborne through Sekiro. That's From's MO, the kinds of games they make. The difficulty is not there just because. It's an important part of the atmosphere of the game. It's not a coincidence that many of From's games since King's Field have had a crestfallen warrior type of character at the very beginning of the game. As for DS3, it's not exactly a starting point for the series -- its main audience is the people who played the previous games.

    Also, anyone can get good at Dark Souls, if they play it enough. I've seen people going from struggling to figure out the controls to handing the ass to an unexpected invader. Even Jeff Green who started the game as a joke of how terrible he is at the game made it to the end. It's not that tough of a game. It's challenging, yes, but it's mostly fair and gives you all the tools to beat it, even some extremely overpowered tools.

    Anyway, Mark Brown, as always, makes the argument better than I can:

    Last edited by Starker; 28th May 2019 at 21:26.

  11. #436
    PC Gamering Smartey Man
    I <3 consoles and gamepads

    Registered: Aug 2007
    Location: New Zealand
    PC version of Spyro the Dragon: Reignited Trilogy is on the way. No signs of a Switch release at this time.

  12. #437
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    Be crazy if they didn't release that on the Switch.

  13. #438
    PC Gamering Smartey Man
    I <3 consoles and gamepads

    Registered: Aug 2007
    Location: New Zealand
    On June 6th, Nvidia are releasing a ray tracing remaster mod for Quake 2.
    https://www.exclusivelygames.com/qua...cing-graphics/


  14. #439
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    That's very nice, but I don't remember Quake 2 being set on a planet that spun so fast that sunlight slid across its levels like that.

  15. #440
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    Dark Souls is not a mainstream game, catering to masses.
    Sure. But that doesn't mean you can't enjoy the game, unless your main objective in gaming is to overcome challenge. I don't care much for challenge. If I'd want a challenge, I'd go study medicine and become a doctor and save people's lives. And despite I am not part of the target audience for DS (according to you and maybe Miyazaki), I still enjoyed the games.
    You can tell that from the tutorial alone -- where other games would teach you step by step the mechanics of the game, DS tells you what the controls are and lets you figure things out on your own.
    Not telling us about the control is not a problem. But lots of other aspects of DS are. E.g. I would never have used humanity if I hadn't read about how to summon NPCs. Because humanity is limited and scarce. So you'd think "I better save it for when I know what it does, or when I really need it". Same with the quests. I would guess that less than 10% of players finishes quests in DS games without looking them up on the net. They are too obscure, and require way too much precise ordering of events. The quests in DS games are just not good (unless you look them up on a wiki. Or you're playing the game for the 5th time). I've read posts from people who did not upgrade their estus-flasks, because they thought bone-shards were one-time use things. DS is good, but not perfect. So there must be ways to make it better. For the people who played the game. But also for the people who didn't play the game. I'm always in the camp of "more options is good".

    It's aimed at people who are to a degree already games literate, not for people who hold the controller for the first time.
    I dare you to find anyone over the age of 6 in the civilized world who has not held a controller before.
    Again, I agree there are lots of things that people can figure out on themselves. But some are a lot harder. And it's not always about figuring out stuff, it's also about executing them. I'm pretty smart (if I may say so myself), but my execution in games suck. And I've seen people who are even worse than me. You don't want those people to enjoy any games ?

    That's From's MO, the kinds of games they make.
    Understood. That doesn't mean I agree with that. It's nice that challenge gives satisfaction. But if you can't overcome the challenge, there is no satisfaction, not even a game. And if you dont' care for challenge, there is no satisfaction either. I'll give you another example from my own experience: almost 20 years ago, I played a lot of Unreal Tournament. I loved the game. But after a while I realized that playing online would make me feel miserable. Almost depressed. Because: 1) when I won a game, I'd think "the opponents must suck, I was lucky, it was nothing". And 2) when I lost, I thought "I suck, I'm terrible". I loved moving around in the game-world of UT. But I didn't enjoy the competition or challenge. And then I played Morrowind. Loved it. And lots of other single-player games. Even WoW. You can play and enjoy those games both when you're an awesome gamer and when you suck.

    It's an important part of the atmosphere of the game.
    Sure. And still there are things that could be improved. Not just decreasing bosses' health or increasing the players armor.
    If I had to make an easy mode for DS games, it would something like this:

    *) You can always go from normal mode to easy mode. At the start of a new game, but also in the middle.
    *) You can never go from easy mode to normal. Well, maybe at the start of NG+.
    *) When playing easy mode, you are always embered, or in human form.
    So you always have the health benefits (and other benefits, like resistance, etc).
    When you die, you stay embered/human.
    *) So you can always summon NPCs or players to help you.
    *) You can never get summoned (to help another player). Except to help other players who also play in easy-mode.
    *) You can never be invaded (biggy).
    *) There will be a few more bonfires in the game. Bonfires just outside the fog-gates of bosses.
    In easy-mode, you can always run to a boss without fighting trash.
    (Like the Rotten in DS2, or later bosses in DS3).
    *) When you make a trade, you have an hour to "undo" the trade. You can go back to the trader and get the same amount of souls back.
    If you bought something (a weapon) and beat a boss, then the sale become permanent earlier.
    *) Same thing with upgrading and infusing weapons.
    You can undo it, get your materials and souls back. But if you use the weapon to beat a boss, the deal is permanent.
    *) More flexibility when doing quests. Maybe a little more explaination (by NPCs) what to do next.
    The text in DS-games is sometimes very cryptic. And uses pretty obscure words. In a way that is fun.
    But as a non-native english speaker, it often gets hard to understand what the NPC says. Especially if they say it only once.
    *) When a player dies, he loses half his souls, not all of them. Or maybe the amount can gradually increase.
    E.g. you lose no souls if you die before beating a boss. Once you beat a boss, you lose 10% of your souls.
    After beating a 2nd boss, you lose 20%. Etc. After beating 10 bosses, you lose all 100% of souls, like you do now.
    Not sure about this one. But the goal is to let new players level up early, even when they die a lot.
    *) I'm sure there are more things that can be done to improve the game for new players.
    I'll write them down when I think of more.

    I think these changes would reduce the tedium a bit.
    They don't reduce the difficulty of bosses at all.
    So hopefully it would make the game less frustrating, and equally challenging and rewarding.

    Also, anyone can get good at Dark Souls, if they play it enough. ... It's challenging, yes, but it's mostly fair and gives you all the tools to beat it, even some extremely overpowered tools.
    Sure. This again is: hard to learn, easy once you've mastered it. Fine when you play the game multiple times (like I do). But if you play a game only once, it doesn't help you much. And most of the tools are there for experienced players. Or available when you read a lot of walk-throughs and wikis. Not my favorite way of learning a game. It's fine if some things (like using magic/faith/dark) are a bit obscure and available in reality only to experienced players. Or that experienced players can run from boss to boss, avoiding fighting trash mobs completely. But when core mechanics are hidden (like humanity, summoning, etc) that can be improved, imho.

    Mark Brown makes a good point. But the point again is mostly: "when the game wouldn't be hard, you won't feel the level of satisfaction once you beat the game". That is true for some players. But not for others. I think that with some adjustments, the game could appeal to a broader audience. Without taking anything away from the current audience. That's my point.

    Anyway, I think I've made my point. Even Dark Souls, which is an awesome game, could be made more attractive, without losing its appeal to current players. I think something similar could have been done for Pathologic 2. I think it's a shame that Icepick Lodge didn't even try, and just made their game less accessible. And your point is: some players enjoy challenging games, and if you don't, go play something else.
    Last edited by Gryzemuis; 29th May 2019 at 09:12.

  16. #441
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by EvaUnit02 View Post
    On June 6th, Nvidia are releasing a ray tracing remaster mod for Quake 2.
    https://www.exclusivelygames.com/qua...cing-graphics/
    That looks awesome !
    If they manage to introduce ray-tracing in modern-looking games, that would finally be a good reason to buy a new videocard.

    If that doesn't happen soon, then I think my 3-year old gtx1080 Founders Edition will last for another 3+ years. It's ridiculous. In 2012 I build a new PC. i5-3570K and gtx680. I planned to replace the cpu and gpu as soon as something new came along for roughly the same price but twice the performance. In 2016 I upgraded my then 4-year old gtx680 to a gtx1080. But I still have my i5-3570K. I recently looked at benchmarks. And unless you use software that really makes use of more than 4 cores, the most expensive intel cpu (at 500+ euros) runs only 25% faster than my i5-3570K (which costed only 210 euros). While using more wattage too. A bit disappointing.

  17. #442
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Good lord, why is that so bright? Not that it was the moodiest game to begin with, especially compared to the original, but what little it had is gone.

  18. #443
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    And your point is: some players enjoy challenging games, and if you don't, go play something else.
    No it's not. My point is that the challenge is an important part of Dark Souls and that almost anyone can get good enough at Dark Souls to beat it, because it's really not all that hard. I've seen it happen over and over again because watching blind playthroughs of Dark Souls is a small hobby of mine. It's amazing, a bit like watching the complete transformation of a person over a matter of weeks. If you are willing to stick to it, learn, and bend to the game, it will happen without fail. Your problem is that you want games to bend to you, to cater to your specific tastes as if it was something universal that most people wanted.

    But the bigger problem here is that if you changed Dark Souls to cater to the mainstream, it would lose its singular focus and a lot of its appeal. That fan fervor, that joy of figuring things out, the shared frustration, it wouldn't exist to nearly the degree it has been for now. It would be just another game to play through. And the game is already balanced to the breaking point. If you pick up magic, it can break the game. If you level too much and get ahead of the curve, it will break the game. If you summon other players, they carry you through most of the game. God forbid they are the generous sort and give you items, because that will for sure break the game. I've seen a newbie get tons of titanite and other items from an invader and joyfully grabbing them, only to come to regret it later, because it took away most of the joy of searching for and finding items.

    Anyway, I really hope that From will not start chasing that mainstream market, because it will only go downhill from there.

  19. #444
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    Not sure why all this Dark Souls talk is in the Hype thread, but... I've just been playing Dark Souls 3 myself for the first time, so I guess I can chime in.

    Dark Souls' tutorial does not "tell you what the controls are and lets you figure things out on your own", because it doesn't even tell you the controls. My biggest annoyance with the game early on is that it always lists random symbols for controls and you have to work out which key that actually means by trial and error, sometimes by just pressing every key on the keyboard until something happens. I don't understand how a game that is so polished in other areas can't be bothered to change the labels based on the input device you're using.


    Also, I have to agree that the game is ridiculously obscure in many areas. It doesn't explain basic mechanics that you need to know in order to actually play the game, some of them being so obscure that you are unlikely to figure them out without a wiki or stumbling across them by mistake.
    It's also terrible at actually explaining what items and spells do, since the descriptions are always vague and certainly never give numbers.
    The way the setting is barely explained and you have to piece together the parts of the mystery is great. The way that the actual game mechanics are not explained and you have to read a wiki is not. It's bad design which can be overlooked by all the other things which the Dark Souls series does right.

  20. #445
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    So back to games HYPED earlier in this thread: Anyone try Void Bastards yet?

  21. #446
    Thing What Kicks
    Registered: Apr 2004
    Location: London
    I'm interested, but waiting to see what others think before taking the plunge.

  22. #447
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    Same here. Initial reviews seem good, even if the procedural nature of play means there's a certain grind component baked in.

  23. #448
    Thing What Kicks
    Registered: Apr 2004
    Location: London
    I've taken the plunge; turns out I've just received a 25% off voucher for Void Bastards due to owning System Shock 2.

  24. #449
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    Good show. Tell us about it when you can! Meanwhile, I've gone and gotten Outer Wilds because the concept is almost immediately my jam.

  25. #450
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2007
    Location: Sevastapol Station
    I just found out about Void Bastards yesterday. It's a pretty big want right now and strained finances are the only thing keeping me from a day one purchase.
    I'll have to occupy myself with Audible today. They just released their audio drama of William Gibsons unproduced Alien 3 script. Michael Biehn and Lance Henricksen are both voice actors for their respective roles. That one's been pretty hyped for the last little while. Maybe VB after the next paycheque.

Page 18 of 20 FirstFirst ... 381314151617181920 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •